A Study of the Dyadic Associations of Self-Compassion on Sexual Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction: Evidence of Differential Associations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent research has supported the positive effects of self-compassion for couples' relationships; however, these efforts have only recently been applied to couples' sexuality. Although there is some evidence supporting the associations between self-compassion and sexual satisfaction when satisfaction is conceptualized unidimensionally, it is unclear if and to what degree those associations are different for satisfaction and dissatisfaction when these constructs are assessed separately. The aim of this study was to understand the associations between self-compassion separately for sexual satisfaction and sexual dissatisfaction for romantic partner dyads. A sample of 230 married midlife Canadian couples participated in an online survey. Findings from distinguishable Actor Partner Interdependence Models indicated that women and men with higher levels of self-compassion reported more sexual satisfaction and less sexual dissatisfaction but the effects were stronger for satisfaction than dissatisfaction. Only men's self-compassion affected women's sexual dissatisfaction, but not vice versa. Findings are discussed in terms of their relevance to societal attitudes and application to sex and couples therapy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".